From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9C9C433E0 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 23:43:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E934208C7 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 23:43:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726871AbgFOXno (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:43:44 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:56734 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726601AbgFOXnn (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2020 19:43:43 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E24671FB; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e113632-lin.cambridge.arm.com (e113632-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.46]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E28253F73C; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:43:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Valentin Schneider To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com Subject: [PATCH v2 0/4] sched: Instrument sched domain flags Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 00:41:50 +0100 Message-Id: <20200615234154.23982-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.27.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, I've repeatedly stared at an SD flag and asked myself "how should that be set up in the domain hierarchy anyway?". I figured that if we formalize our flags zoology a bit, we could also do some runtime assertions on them - this is what this series is all about. Patches ======= The idea is to associate the flags with a metatype that describes how they should be set in a sched domain hierarchy - details are in the comments and commit logs. For now it's just a simple parent/children relationship description ("if this SD has it, all its {parents, children} have it"). The good thing is that this all goes away when CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG isn't set. The bad thing is that replaces SD_* flags definitions with some unsavoury macros. This is mainly because I wanted to avoid having to duplicate work between declaring the flags and declaring their metatypes. There's also the removal of yet another SD flag (SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN). Some deltas =========== This time around it's a slight size increase (w/o SCHED_DEBUG): $ compare.sh before after vmlinux.o cpu_attach_domain 996 1000 +4 build_sched_domains 4716 4728 +12 Comparing the objdumps side by side, nothing obvious stands out to me. Revisions ========= RFC -> v2 --------- RFC at: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200311183320.19186-1-valentin.schneider@arm.com o Rebased on top of tip/sched/core o Aligned wording of comments between flags o Rectified some flag descriptions (Morten) o Added removal of SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN (Morten) Cheers, Valentin Valentin Schneider (4): sched/topology: Split out SD_* flags declaration to its own file sched/topology: Define and assign sched_domain flag metadata sched/topology: Verify SD_* flags setup when sched_debug is on arm, sched/topology: Remove SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 2 +- include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h | 133 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/sched/topology.h | 29 +++---- kernel/sched/topology.c | 27 +++++-- 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) create mode 100644 include/linux/sched/sd_flags.h -- 2.27.0